Grieved, SS Session 07, Summer 2018 (2)

,

First Thoughts

As the power of sin is either progressively subdued in our lives or allowed to dominate our lives, our families will either be built up or torn down. God has established the family as a place where we are to love and be loved. Families thrive when members respond to one another in Christlike love. Sin, however, divides families and people.

How much influence does family have on our spiritual lives? How can one’s spiritual life impact his or her family?

UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT

We do not know how much time separated the events of from the events of , but it was probably at least several years, if not more than a decade. When we get to chapter 13, some of David’s sons are grown men with houses of their own (). What is important, however, is that the narrator chose to put the account of the rape of Tamar (13:1-14) immediately after the account of David’s sin and God’s judgment on him (11:1–12:31). There were many other events that took place around this time. They involved David personally, or international relations, or other important persons. But 2 Samuel disregards all those other stories and moves directly into this terrible story of a rape within the palace.

God had told David that because of what he had done, violence would tear apart his family (12:10). The narrator wants us to see the process by which God’s judgment on David began to come about. The rape of Tamar started a chain of events that would culminate in David’s fleeing Jerusalem while Israel plunged into civil war.

The central event of this chapter is the rape of Tamar. The major characters are Amnon, Tamar, Jonadab, and Absalom.

Amnon was the son of David by Ahinoam of Jezreel (; ), whom he married before he became king. Amnon was, in fact, David’s firstborn son and was the presumptive heir. Even while David was still alive, Amnon would have been a powerful figure in palace politics. Other than what we see of him in , however, we know nothing more about him.

Jonadab () was the son of David’s brother, Shimeah. As David’s nephew, he had no hope of gaining the throne. He seems to have been an opportunist, seeking to ingratiate himself with the powerful. Since Amnon was very high in the palace hierarchy, he sought to curry favor with him by telling him how he could corner and rape Tamar. Although 13:3 calls Jonadab a “friend” of Amnon, he appears to have had little real affection for him. Later, when he told David about the death of Amnon, he was quite cool about it and did not urge that Amnon be avenged (also, the word for “friend” might be translated more neutrally as “companion”). We do not know what became of Jonadab; after the account of Amnon’s death, the text never mentions him again.

In your mind what character, real or fictional, best personifies the evil instigator?

Tamar was the daughter of Maacah, daughter of Talmai, king of Geshur (). This would have been a political marriage. As the daughter of two royal households, however, Tamar would have had high prestige. Outside of , however, we know nothing about her.

She was evidently named for the Tamar of , the mother of two clans of Judah. This earlier Tamar had also been wronged at the hands of her male family members. She was successively the wife of two of Judah’s sons, Er and Onan, but when these two died leaving her childless, Judah refused to give her his third son, Shelah, and sent her away. Tamar seduced Judah by posing as a prostitute and by him gave birth to Perez and Zerah; Perez was the ancestor of David. In the end, Judah confessed that she had been in the right and that he had defrauded her (). As readers, we are probably meant to recognize the coincidence that the two women had the same name and similarly hard lives.

Absalom was a son of David by Maacah and thus was a full brother to Tamar. He was third in line for the throne and thus not as powerful as Amnon, but he was charismatic and knew how to attract a following.

The account of the rape is, as one would expect, gruesome (). Amnon was infatuated with Tamar but irritated that he could not get to her because she was a virgin. The virgin daughters of Israelite families, especially of well-to-do families, were kept quite sequestered to preserve their virginity for the day of their marriage. Evidently, Amnon was used to getting whatever he wanted, and the fact that he could not have her both wounded his pride and enflamed his desire. Taking Jonadab’s advice, he feigned illness. Even simple diseases could be fatal in the ancient world, and palace officials, anxious to do anything that might help him rally, quickly agreed when he asked that Tamar be his nurse. Alone with her, he forcibly raped her. Looking upon her pathetic destitution after the event, he despised her and threw her out.

Why was Amnon frustrated? (13:1-2)

In what way was Amnon’s sin like the sin of his father David with Bathsheba?

What was Tamar’s response to Amnon’s treatment of her?

(Ancient Laws in the Middle East Handout)

(Ancient Laws in the Middle East Handout)

It is perhaps surprising that Tamar suggested that Amnon marry her (13:13), since conjugal relations between siblings (even with a half-sibling) was strictly forbidden. says, “You are not to have sexual intercourse with your sister, either your father’s daughter or your mother’s, whether born at home or born elsewhere. You are not to have sex with her.” But it is a sad fact that the early Israelites often did not know or follow the commands of the law particularly closely. Also, marriage between siblings was not unknown in royal families in the Near East. Most importantly, throughout the ancient world (and not only in Israel), a young woman was thought to be disgraced by the loss of her virginity prior to marriage, even if it was not her fault. To us this seems totally unfair, but Tamar would have been desperate and willing to do whatever was necessary to remove this reproach from herself.

EXPLORE THE TEXT

Shattered ()

Verses 15-20

ESV Then Amnon hated her with very great hatred, so that the hatred with which he hated her was greater than the love with which he had loved her. And Amnon said to her, "Get up! Go!" (16) But she said to him, "No, my brother, for this wrong in sending me away is greater than the other that you did to me." But he would not listen to her. (17) He called the young man who served him and said, "Put this woman out of my presence and bolt the door after her." (18) Now she was wearing a long robe with sleeves, for thus were the virgin daughters of the king dressed. So his servant put her out and bolted the door after her. (19) And Tamar put ashes on her head and tore the long robe that she wore. And she laid her hand on her head and went away, crying aloud as she went. (20) And her brother Absalom said to her, "Has Amnon your brother been with you? Now hold your peace, my sister. He is your brother; do not take this to heart." So Tamar lived, a desolate woman, in her brother Absalom's house.

So Amnon hated Tamar. Amnon’s subsequent hatred for Tamar shows that he was not just a young man who succumbed to his passions; he was thoroughly evil, Amnon was implicitly pagan. Biblical readers will recall the story of Shechem and Dinah, and note how different Amnon’s attitude was from that of Shechem, who still loved Dinah deeply after he had violated her (). Amnon used Tamar, lost interest, and threw her away.

Why, when we finally get the thing we have wanted most, are we often less than satisfied? The pursuit of sin is more appealing than the conclusion of sin.

The story tells us that the virgin daughters wore a distinctive garment that marked their virginity. Whatever its appearance, the clothing was worn only by virgins. Tamar tore it apart both as an expression of grief and as a vivid, physical metaphor for how her virginity had been ripped from her. The lost innocence of Tamar vividly reflected what was happening to David’s whole family.

Absalom’s response to Tamar seems cold: Be quiet for now, my sister. He is your brother. Don’t take this thing to heart. Indeed, she herself may have taken his words to mean that he had little sympathy for her plight, although he did take her into his own home and shelter her. But it is clear from the subsequent narrative that Absalom was far from indifferent to what Amnon had done. He hated Amnon deeply, and he would carefully and patiently plot Amnon’s destruction. But to do this, he needed Tamar to remain quiet and in the background. The last time we see Tamar, she is desolate and isolated. She would be regarded as a disgraced woman, and her chances of a good marriage were drastically diminished.

When we sin against others we can destroy their lives. Amnon, however, was indifferent to this.

Devastated ()

The story tells us that David was very angry over what Amnon had done (13:21), but he did not do anything about it. He could have deprived Amnon of the right of the firstborn, as Jacob had done to Reuben (). He could have permanently exiled Amnon, a penalty that was well-known in the ancient world. David could have punished the offense and ended the matter, but his failure to act almost guaranteed that worse things would come.

A full two years passed, during which time Absalom remained aloof. He could not show open hostility, since Amnon was the most powerful of the king’s sons, but he could not bring himself to feign friendliness to Amnon. Thus, “Absalom didn’t say anything to Amnon, either good or bad, because he hated Amnon since he disgraced his sister Tamar” (). Absalom probably used the time to build up a base of support for himself. He had the ability to sway people to follow him, a skill that he would later turn against David (15:1-6).

Absalom’s opportunity came during sheep-shearing season. This was a time of festivity, since a large quantity of wool for selling would mean wealth for the owner of the sheep (see 25:2,36). Inviting people to his estate for a festival at such a time would not seem unusual. It might have seemed suspicious that Absalom insisted that Amnon come to the festivities, but this was a moment that Amnon’s high status worked against him. Since he was the eldest son, people would assume that Absalom wanted him to come because of Amnon’s prestige, and not suspect that in fact Absalom wanted to kill him.

Just as Amnon had used deceit to rape Tamar, Absalom used deceit to kill Amnon. He threw a big party, provided plenty of wine, and waited until Amnon was drunk. Amnon’s supporters would also have been inebriated by this time, and none of them would be in a condition to spot or react to danger. Absalom’s faction placed themselves in strategic positions and struck. No one could resist; panic ensued, and all the rest of the royal family fled. Exaggerated accounts of what had happened reached David before any of his children made it home, and David was told that they were all dead.

Verses 31-36

ESV Then the king arose and tore his garments and lay on the earth. And all his servants who were standing by tore their garments. (32) But Jonadab the son of Shimeah, David's brother, said, "Let not my lord suppose that they have killed all the young men, the king's sons, for Amnon alone is dead. For by the command of Absalom this has been determined from the day he violated his sister Tamar. (33) Now therefore let not my lord the king so take it to heart as to suppose that all the king's sons are dead, for Amnon alone is dead." (34) But Absalom fled. And the young man who kept the watch lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, many people were coming from the road behind him by the side of the mountain. (35) And Jonadab said to the king, "Behold, the king's sons have come; as your servant said, so it has come about." (36) And as soon as he had finished speaking, behold, the king's sons came and lifted up their voice and wept. And the king also and all his servants wept very bitterly.

With the news that all the royal offspring were dead, David and his court went into deep mourning, with the king lying on the ground with his clothes torn. Surprisingly, it was Jonadab who gave the correct information to David and his men, only Amnon had been killed. This was the same Jonadab who advised Amnon in how to entrap Tamar. Jonadab knew even more about the situation: In fact, Absalom has planned this ever since the day Amnon disgraced his sister Tamar.

How did Jonadab know all of this? He was an opportunist

It is possible he had been at the feast but had somehow raced back to Jerusalem ahead of the royal family, but that seems unlikely. Even if he did manage to get back to Jerusalem first, how did he know that Absalom had been planning Amnon’s murder for two years? We cannot know the answers, but surely the narrator gives us this information about what Jonadab said for a reason.

The story gives us the impression that Jonadab was a conniving palace insider who had a lot of information and who used his information to gain the favor of powerful figures. After Amnon’s rape of Tamar, he may have decided that Amnon did not have a bright future. He evidently surmised or learned that Absalom was planning to murder Amnon, but decided that he would not interfere. He probably knew that Absalom had no intention of killing any others. Thus, he could raise his standing before the distraught David. Jonadab gave him the good news everyone but Amnon was alive, and he looked like a hero when a herald announced that the royal offspring had just come back safely to Jerusalem. It at least seems clear that there was a great deal of intrigue and positioning for power within the palace, and that Jonadab was at the center.

We read in 13:36, Just as he (Jonadab) finished speaking, the king’s sons entered and wept loudly. Then the king and all his servants also wept very bitterly. Since they now knew that everyone else was safe, their weeping had to be over Amnon. This is somewhat surprising.

Did David and his court not know how evil Amnon was?

Grieving was natural (Amnon was David’s son), but such extreme lamentation over a deplorable man surprises us. David’s wretched weeping reveals a character trait that will appear again in the story: He loved his children dearly, but he could not discipline or control them, and he did not know them for what they were. Absalom was profoundly charismatic, and possibly Amnon was, too. They could project images of themselves that David could not penetrate, perhaps because he had never taken the time to get to know them. David’s devotion to them was based on an illusion.

A great deal of violence occurs within families. These are not always spontaneous, but are acts of revenge that arise from prior violence, neglect, or abuse. How does this show that revenge is not the answer?

Separated ()

Verses 37-39

ESV But Absalom fled and went to Talmai the son of Ammihud, king of Geshur. And David mourned for his son day after day. (38) So Absalom fled and went to Geshur, and was there three years. (39) And the spirit of the king longed to go out to Absalom, because he was comforted about Amnon, since he was dead.

Absalom, knowing that David would be emotional and dangerous in the immediate aftermath of the death of Amnon, fled. Absalom fled to Geshur in Syria northeast of the Sea of Galilee. This city was ruled by Talmai, his mother’s father (Talmai, a king of the region). He may have known (or hoped) that David would eventually get over his anger and invite him back. David did turn his heart toward Absalom after a period of mourning, but did not allow him to return. Thus, David was left mourning for two sons. The one was dead by murder, and the other was in exile.

Events had become catastrophically bad. David committed adultery, Amnon committed rape, and Absalom committed murder. Surrounding it all was faction and intrigue. Each sin rebounded in a more amplified manner, and the royal family was caught in a tornado of violence and lust, the family members spiraling further apart as things became increasingly chaotic.

Chapter 14 tells the story of how David was persuaded to recall Absalom from exile. It is an unusual story, and it involves an unnamed woman known only as “a wise woman” from Tekoa (14:2). It involved the same kind of deception that Nathan had employed against David: Telling him a made-up story designed to get the king to pronounce a judgment, and then telling him that the story actually concerned the king himself (see ).

Joab summoned her for help when he realized that he needed to resolve the continuing tension between David and Absalom. Joab told her what to say. Following his instructions, she approached David pretending to be distraught, and she gave him the fictitious account of how one of her sons had killed the other and fled into exile. She begged that David issue a command that her exiled son should be allowed to return home without fear of reprisal to continue her lineage. When David said that he would do that, she effectively told him that it was all a story and that the real point was that he should recall Absalom. He yielded to her pleas, but perceived that Joab had been behind the whole ploy. Absalom was allowed to come home.

We know little about the woman. She was from Tekoa, just south of Bethlehem, the ancestral home of David and Joab. This may account for how Joab knew about her. Although she is called “wise,” it appears she was no sage, since the whole plan was Joab’s. Her principal skill was acting, and she certainly had David fooled.

It is curious how the narrative extends the account. Even after David said that he would place his protection over her (fictional) exiled son, she twice more pleaded with him to protect the boy (14:7-11). Only after he had made his promise three times did she reveal that she was actually interceding for Absalom (14:12-15). She also indicated that failure to recall Absalom could provoke a crisis in Israel, implying that she feared civil war. This would put everyone in grave danger, including her real son, since the war would ravage the land and take many innocent lives (14:16-17). After she confessed that Joab had conceived of the plan, Joab himself fell on his face before David, both thanking David for recalling Absalom and seeking forgiveness for having manipulated the king.

What is the point of this extended narrative? It tells us that David had been informed that his actions were putting the whole nation at risk. Absalom was a dangerous man to have as an enemy; David could have either executed him for murder or pardoned him on the grounds that Amnon had brought down the violence on his own head. David had done neither. Even in recalling Absalom, however, David (apparently angry about being maneuvered by Joab) refused to see Absalom. He did not create a true reconciliation. And Absalom was truly a dangerous man when provoked. Handsome, charismatic, cunning, and patient, he had all the skills needed for toppling David from the throne. The civil war that Joab feared would not be avoided.

Think of modern examples of families estranged by sin.

How do their stories of divorce, estranged children, and grown siblings who refuse to speak fit the pattern of this biblical account?

Does sin always lead to separation and broken relationships? Explain.

Final Thoughts

David and his children had the benefit of the first five books of the Bible to study and learn from about God, history, and human nature. With five books David still fell into sin when he was distracted from God’s purposes for David.

3000 years later we have 52 books of the Bible to study and learn from about God, history and human nature. We see people still the same in today’s world, making the same mistakes as David and Amnon and Absalom. Our hope can not be placed in man’s ability to change but in the steadfastness of God’s love and mercy toward those He calls his own.

What overwhelming desire should you examine for its purity before you pursue it at all costs?

What steps can you take to evaluate objectively the character and motives of your "advisors"?